Case Explained: CORDOVA VELASCO V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-14 The Ninth Circuit denied the petition for review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upholding an Immigration Judge’s dismissal of Jose Raymundo Cordova Velasco’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court applied a substantial evidence standard to factual findings and de novo review to legal questions. Regarding asylum and withholding of removal, the court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that Cordova Velasco failed to establish the required nexus between his past persecution and membership in his proposed particular social group, “Salvadoran land-owning family.” The agency reasonably determined that the three incidents of violence he alleged—robbery attempts in 2011, a beating by a man dressed as a police officer in 2014, and being shot at while refusing to join armed men in 2014—were motivated by ordinary criminality or random recruitment efforts rather than his family status. The court noted that the petitioner’s desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft bears no nexus to a protected ground. Additionally, the court precluded review of a new social group claim regarding “family of a Salvadoran individual who opposed gang norms” because Cordova Velasco failed to exhaust this argument before the agency. Regarding CAT relief, the court found substantial evidence supporting the denial of relief because Cordova Velasco failed to demonstrate that he would more likely than not be tortured with the consent or acquiescence of a public official upon removal. The court reasoned that isolated incidents, such as seeing the police officer who beat him at a gas station, did not constitute torture under CAT definitions. Furthermore, while country condition reports acknowledged human rights violations in El Salvador, they did not indicate that Cordova Velasco faced a particular threat of torture beyond what any other citizen would endure. The practical consequence is that the petition for review is denied, and the BIA’s order affirming the dismissal of his immigration relief applications remains in effect. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.